^'4 


[4 


The 

Origin  and  Function 

of  Ceremonies  in 

Judaism 


By 

Dr.  K.  Kohler 

CINCINNATI,  OHIO 


BM700 
.K7q 


CENTRAL  CONFERENCE  OF  AMERICAN  RABBIS 


1907 


J 


%M\'^^ 


A\JA'^M.ii^y 


jkM^^y^JS^. 


The 

Origin  and  Function 

of  Ceremonies  in 

Judaism 


Dr.  K.  Kohler 

CINCINNATI,  OHIO 


%. 


BM700 
.K7q 


CENTRAL  CONFERENCE  OF  AMERICAN  RABBIS 
1907 


13M700 
X79 


D 

THE  ORIGIN  AND  FUNCTION  OF  CERKMOXIES  IN 

JUDAISM 

By  Dk.  K.  KoriLKii,  Cincinnati,  Ohio 

The  significance  of  ceremony  in  the  rehgious  life  of  the  Jew 
forms  one  of  the  main  points  at  issue  between  Orthodoxy  and  Re- 
form. To  Rabbinical  Judaism  the  Sinaitic  Law,  written  or  oral,  is 
immutable  (compare  with  Maimonides'  ninth  article  his  Code  H. 
Yesode  ha  Torah  ix),  each  of  the  613  commandments  being  re- 
garded as  fundamental  (David  ben  Zimra  Responsa  i,  344).  The 
distinction  made  between  moral  laws  dictated  by  reason  and  ritual 
laws  which  ratlier  baffle  reason  and  common  sense  (Sifra  Ahare 
Moth  xiii ;  Yoma  67b)  does  not  imply  that  the  former  are  of  greater 
importance,  nor  does  the  latter  classification  of  the  Mosaic  laws 
into  rational  or  social  and  divinely  revealed  ones  (Saadia  Emunoth 
iii.  1-2,  Ibn  Ezra  to  Exod.  xxi.  2  and  Kuzari  II/48 ;  iii.  7,  11)  place 
the  former  class  higher  than  the  latter.  "The  divine  precepts, 
whether  their  purposes  are  intelligible  to  us  or  not,  demand  unre- 
served obedience"  says  Maimonides  (Moreh  iii.  26,  with  reference 
to  Yoma  67b,  Sanhcdrin  21b,  Bereshith  Rabba  44,  comp.  Berakot 
33b).  Nay  more.  While  dividing  the  Mosaic  laws  into  universally 
human  or  social  and  specifically  Jewish  or  religious  precepts,  Mai- 
monides expressly  assigns  to  the  latter  a  higher  rank  in  view  of 
their  ulterior  spiritual  aims  and  purposes.  (Moreh  iii.  27  and  Mish- 
nah  Commentary  Peah.  i.  i).  Nor  do  Simeon  Duran  (Magen 
Aboth  at  the  beginning)  and  Albo  (Ikkarim  iii.  25)  take  a  diflferent 
view  -when  speaking  of  the  ceremonial  laws  in  contradistinction  to 
the  moral  and  social  or  juridical  statutes,  since  for  them  also  the 
former  as  the  religious  or  divinely  revealed  ones  claim  a  higher 
place  as  constituting  the  Jewish  mode  of  worshiping  God.  Viewed 
in  this  light,  Moses  Mendelssohn  was  in  perfect  accord  with  tradi- 
tion when,  rationalist  as  he  was,  he  declared  the  ceremonial  laws  to 


be  the  essential  portion  of  the  Mosaic  legislation,  whereas  the  ethical 
laws  of  the  Pentateuch,  being-  dictates  of  reason  and  common-sense, 
are  the  universal  property  of  mankind.  "In  order,  then,  to  have  a 
people  of  pure  theists  in  the  midst  of  a  world  of  polytheists,  the 
divine  law-giver  had  to  bind  the  members  of  the  Jewish  nation  to- 
gether by  the  observance  of  certain  practices  which  were  to  serve 
as  signs  and  symbols  expressive  of  religious  and  ethical  truths.  In- 
stead of  imposed  dogmatic  beliefs  which  shackle  the  -human  intel- 
lect, these  ceremonies  should  form  a  species  of  picture-language  to 
awaken  and  foster  certain  thoughts  in  the  minds  of  all  and  appeal 
to  the  h^art  of  each  so  as  to  render  them  guardians  of  pure  theism. 
These  bonds,  then,  intended  to  keep  Israel's  people  together  for  all 
time  are  forever  to  remain  in  force,  whether  their  original  purpose 
be  still  understood  or  not,  until  it  would  please  the  Most  High  to 
reveal  His  will  anew  in  a  legislation  as  solemn,  as  positive  and  as 
all-powerful  as  was  the  one  on  Sinai."  This  well-known  view  pre- 
sented by  Mendelssohn  in  his  Jerusalem,  says  Zunz  in  his  "Gutach- 
ten  ueber  die  Beschneidung,"  1844,  prevailed  for  some  time,  and 
Zunz  himself  as  well  as  Reggio,  whom  he  quotes,  shares  it  in  so  far 
as  both  lay  all  stress  upon  the  ceremonial  law  as  being  peculiarly 
Jewish  and  bound  up  with  the  memories  a'nd  hopes  of  the  Jewish 
people.  It  is,  however,  a  great  inconsistency  on  the  one  hand 
to  denounce  submission  to  an  imposed  creed  in  the  name  of  liberty 
of  conscience  and  on  the  other  hand  to  demand  blind  submission  to 
imposed  forms  of  practice  which  no  longer  have  any  meaning  for 
us.  It  is  perfectly  logical  for  him  who  believes  in  a  supernatural 
revelation  to  maintain  that,  no  matter  whether  they  appeal  to  our 
understanding  or  not,  the  ritual  laws  demand  obedience  as  "the  de- 
crees of  the  great  Ruler  of  Life  concerning  which  scrutiny  is  not 
permissible."  On  the  part  of  such  as  deny  the  authenticity  of  the 
Pentateuch — and  here  Zunz  and  Graetz  are  on  the  same  side  as  the 
adherents  of  the  Kuenen-Wellhausen  school — blind  adherence  to 
usages  that  have  no  justification  in  themselves  is.  as  Dr.  Geiger,  in 
his  "Wissenschaftliche  Zeitschrift,"  1839,  so  well  characterized  it: 
"Hunde-Gehorsam,"  slavish  practice  without  conviction,  unworthy 
of  thinking  men.  The  whole  Reform  movement,  indeed,  as  is  so 
lucidlv  sliown  by  Dr.  David  Philipson  in  his  scholarly  work:     "The 


Reform  AlovcinciU  in  Judaism"  (see  especially  6-13;  332  f.)  hinges 
on  the  question  whether  Judaism  is  a  system  of  ceremonial  observ- 
ance as  binding  upon  the  Jew  as  is  the  system  of  dogmatic  belief 
upon  the  Christian,  or  whether  Judaism  is  a  system  of  religious  and 
ethical  truths,  the  ceremonies  being  only  the  means  to  higher  ends, 
not  ends  in  themselves. 

It  is  not  the  object  of  this  paper  to  follow  up  the  warfare  waged 
by  the  leaders  of  Reform  against  ceremonialism.  It  is  fully  recog- 
nized today  that  Holdheim  far  overshot  the  mark  or,  as  Dr.  Philip- 
son  aptly  expressed  it  (p.  91  eodem)  "he  made  the  serious  error  of 
quite  underestimating  the  place  of  ceremony  in  the  religious  life," 
when  he  declared  the  whole  ceremonial  law  to  be  the  outcome  of 
Israel's  national  life  and,  therefore,  of  no  validity  for  Judaism  as  a 
religion.  Far  more  correct  was  the  attitude  of  Einhorn  and  Samuel 
Hirsch  at  the  very  outset  when,  in  opposing  the  vagaries  of  the 
Frankfort  Reform  Verein,  they  emphasized  the  need  of  ceremonies 
as  symbolic  expressions  of  the  priest-mission  assigned  to  the  Jew- 
ish people  (see  "Allgemeine  Zeitung  des  Judenthums,"  1844,  p.  88  f. ; 
123  f.,  134  f.  compare  Aaron  Chorin  "Rabbinische  Gutachten  ueber 
die  Vertraeglichkeit  der  freien  Forschung"  1842,  p.  28).  But  in 
how  far  the  ceremonies  are  to  be  regarded  as  essentially  Jewish 
and  therefore  to  be  unalterably  maintained,  and  in  how  far  they  pre- 
sent only  adaptations  from  older  non-Jewish  life  and  accordingly 
permit  of  modifications,  alterations,  and  radical  changes  is  a  ques- 
tion concerning  which  opinions  still  widely  dififer.  In  order  to 
reach  positive  conclusions,  a  historic  review  of  the  ceremonies  in 
their  various  stages  of  growth  is  required,  and  the  principles  under- 
lying their  development  in  the  different  phases  of  religious  life  must 
be  investigated  and  established. 

The  Crigin  and  Development  of  Jewish  Ceremonies 

When  speaking  of  ceremony,  we  must  dismiss  the  notion  we 
moderns  have  that  it  is  a  mere  conventional  form  without  intrinsic 
value  and  meaning.  To  go  back  to  the  Latin,  caerimonia  signifies 
reverence  and  awe  like  the  word  religio  with  which  it  is  frequently 
coupled,  while  the  plural  caerimoniae  denotes  religious  rites,  which 


in  Rome  had  a  inaqical  rather  than  a  symbolical  character.  That 
is  to  say,  the  Roman  ceremonies  were  believed  to  have  a  coercive 
power  over  the  deities.  For  the  pagan  mind  in  general  the  cere- 
monies constitute  religion,  which  is  viewed  simply  as  a  mode  of 
worship  void  of  ethical  purposes.  In  the  course  of  time,  however, 
the  original  object  of  these  ceremonies  is  forgotten,  and  they  be- 
come empty  forms  until  upon  a  higher  stage  they  are  invested  with 
new  meaning  and  made  to  convey  higher  thoughts.  There  is,  con- 
sequently, a  singular  affinity  noticeable  between  the  ceremonies  of 
various  people  and  classes,  since,  as  a  rule,  they  have  a  common 
origin  in  primitive  life.  Ceremonies  are  never  the  creations  of  in- 
dividuals ;  they  grow  and  change  like  languages.  They  are,  as 
Edward  B.  Tylor  in  his  "Primitive  Culture"  and  his  "Researches 
into  Early  History  of  Mankind"  calls  them,  "the  gesture-language 
of  theology."  The  people  that  crave  for  rain,  for  instance,  would 
in  solemn  manner  pour  out  water  before  the  heavenly  power  to  sug- 
gest what  it  should  do  for  them,  and  henceforth  water  libation  be- 
comes part  of  the  sacrificial  ritual  elsewhere.  Each  ceremony  may 
thus  be  traced  to  its  origin  in  primitive  time.  When  the  Occidental 
lifts  his  hat  before  a  superior  today,  he  is  unaware  of  the  far  older 
form  of  showing  submissive  self-surrender  by  stripping  oneself  of 
all  armaments  and  equipments  which,  of  course,  included  the  head- 
gear. This  corresponds  with  the  Oriental  custom  of  taking  off 
the  shoes,  as  Tylor  has  shown.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  regarded 
as  disrespectful  in  the  East  to  receive,  or  be  seen  by,  strangers 
bareheaded,  and  it  stands  to  reason  that  it  is  considered  by  Orientals 
still  more  derogatory  to  the  honor  of  God  to  stand  bareheaded  be- 
fore Him  in  prayer  or  in  sight  of  the  sanctuary.  (See  Mishnah 
Barakot  ix,  5,  where  the  words:  "Lo  yakel  et  rosho  beshaar  ha 
Misrah"  can  only  mean  "One  should  not  bare  his  head  in  sight  of 
the  Holy  of  Holies,"  exactly  as  the  Roman  priests  officiated  only 
with  covered  heads.  Compare  Hughes  Dictionary  of  Islam,  s.  v. 
Head;  and  Jewish  Encyclopedia  s.  v.  Bareheadedness).  You  ob- 
serve at  once  the  pivotal  question  at  issue :  Are  we  as  Jews  in  Occi- 
dental life  to  be  Orientals  in  the  house  of  God,  or  are  we  Occiden- 
tals in  every  respect? 


So  are  forms  of  greeting  mere  questions  of  politeness  to  us.  But 
when  the  Mishnah  in  Berakot,  just  quoted,  dwells  at  some  length 
upon  an  ancient  Pharisaic  institution  to  the  effect  that,  contrary 
to  the  rule  prohibiting  the  use  of  the  sacred  name  of  God  for  pro- 
fane purposes,  men  should  distinctly  pronounce  the  holy  Name 
when  meeting  each  other,  as  did  men  in  Biblical  times,  we  must 
come  to  the  conclusion  that  this  usage  had  a  more  serious  motive. 
No  doubt,  the  fear  of  malign  influences  such  as  that  of  the  evil  eye 
and  the  various  evil  omina  prompted  these  greetings  (comp.  Psalms 
cxxix.  8;  Ruth  ii.  4)  the  real  meaning  of  which  gradually  fell  into 
oblivion. 

Robertson  Smith  in  the  introductory  remarks  to  his  "Religion  of 
the  Semites"  says :  "Behind  the  positive  religions  which  *  *  *  trace 
their  origin  to  the  teaching  of  great  religious  innovators  who  spoke 
as  the  organs  of  a  divine  revelation,  lies  the  body  of  religious  usage 
and  belief  which  cannot  be  traced  to  the  influence  of  individual 
minds.  No  positive  religion  that  has  moved  men  has  been  able  to 
start  with  a  tabula  rasa.  A  new  scheme  of  faith  can  find  a  hearing 
only  by  appealing  to  religious  instincts  and  susceptibilities  that  al- 
ready exist  in  its  audience,  and  it  cannot  reach  these  without  taking 
account  of  the  traditional  forms  in  which  all  religious  feeling  is  em- 
bodied, and  without  speaking  a  language  which  men  accustomed  to 
these  old  forms  can  understand  *  *  *  The  precepts  of  the 
Pentateuch  did  not  create  a  priesthood  and  a  sacrificial  service  on 
an  altogether  independent  basis,  but  only  reshaped  and  remodelled, 
in  accordance  with  a  more  spiritual  doctrine,  institutions  of  an  older 
type  which  in  many  particulars  were  common  to  the  Hebrews  with 
their  heathen  neighbors.  Every  one  who  reads  the  Old  Testament 
with  attention  is  struck  with  the  fact  that  the  origin  and  rationale 
of  sacrifice  are  nowhere  fully  explained ;  that  sacrifice  is  an  essential 
part  of  religion  is  taken  for  granted  as  something  which  is  not  a 
doctrine  peculiar  to  Israel  but  is  universally  admitted  and  acted  on 
ivithout  as  well  as  zvithin  the  limits  of  the  chosen  people."  These 
observations  have  their  bearing  upon  the  whole  Mosaic  Code  with 
its  purity  and  dietary  laws.  Of  course,  the, orthodox  Jew  of  the 
type  of  David  Hoffman  in  Berlin  for  whom  the  Mosaic  Code  with 


its  traditional  interpretation  is  divinely  revealed  and  the  sacrificial 
and  Levitical  laws  only  temporarily  suspended  until  their  reinstate- 
ment by  a  divinely  ordained  power,  can  only  assign  mystical,  or  at 
best  symbolical,  reasons  to  all  the  ceremonies  prescribed  by  the 
Torah.  We,  who  behold  in  relig-ion  an  ever-progressive  force 
working  through  the  inner  consciousness  of  man,  first  collectively 
and  afterwards  individually,  must  ascertain  the  origin  and  purpose 
of  each  and  every  ceremony  in  order  to  find  out  whether  by  appeal- 
ing to  our  minds  and  hearts  it  fulfills  a  religious  function  or 
whether  it  has  become  an  empty  shell  with  the  kernel  gone.  In 
doing  so,  we  must  discriminate  between  the  ancient  ceremonies 
of  Biblical  times  which  are  still  influenced  by  primitive  notions,  the 
Rabbinical  ceremonies  which  received  their  mould  and  character 
under  the  influence  of  conscious  but  authoritative  forces,  and 
modern  ceremonies  which  still  lack  more  or  less  the  authority  of 
historic  powers  and  specific  Jewish  characteristics. 

I.     The  Mosaic  Ceremonial 

The  Mosaic  ceremonial  system,  impressive  as  it  is  with  the 
authority  of  divine  legislation  and  with  the  grandeur  of  a  great 
world-wide  historic  power,  speaks  to  us,  nevertheless,  in  a  religious 
language  not  our  own.  We  have  to  retranslate  it  into  our  own 
mode  of  thinking  and  feeling.  It  is  based  upon  sacrifice  against 
which  our  religious  consciousness  revolts.  It  rests  upon  notions 
of  priestly  holiness  and  purity  which  we  reject.  It  confines  the 
worship  of  the  Most  High  to  the  priesthood  and  the  sanctuary  and 
fails  to  bring  God  nigh  to  the  people  and  home  to  each  heaven- 
aspiring  soul.  Mosaism,  with  its  temple  cult,  it  to  us — and  this  is 
the  essential  difference  between  Reform  and  Orthodox  Judaism — 
only  the  preparatory  stage  to  Rabbinism  with  its  Synagogical  life 
and  to  Modern  Judaism  with  its  many-centered  religious  life. 
Those  who  call  us  Karaites  or  Mosaites  know  neither  what  Kara- 
ism  was  nor  what  Reform  Judaism  staAds  for.  We  believe  in  the 
ever-working  laws  of  historic  evolution  and  see  in  assimilation  the 
force  ever  at  work  in  Judaism's  progress.  The  entire  sacri- 
ficial cult  of  the  Pentateuch  is  the  result  of  a  powerful  assimilation. 


Careful  scientific  investigations  comparing  the  Babylonian,  the 
Phoenician  and  the  old  Arabic  sacrificial  system,  including  even  the 
terminology,  with  that  of  the  Mosaic  Code,  have  established  the  fact 
beyond  a  cavil  of  doubt  that  the  divine  lawgiver,  or  lawgivers,  sim- 
ply adopted  the  rules  and  customs  of  priestly  practice  prevalent  for 
ages,  while  at  the  same  time  eliminating  such  elements  as  were  con- 
nected with  idolatry,  witchcraft  and  the  abominable  orgies  of  the 
Astart  and  Baal  cult,  and  changing  form  and  character  here  and 
there  to  give  the  whole  service  a  higher  and  more  spiritual  meaning 
and  purpose.  The  fundamental  principle  that  all  the  sacrificial  and 
priestly  practices  should,  by  various  degrees  of  purity  and  sanctity, 
lead  up  to  and  culminate  in  the  divine  ideal  of  Holiness,  in  a  Holy 
God  whose  sacredness  is  to  eradiate  from  the  sanctuary  and  impart 
itself  to  the  people  over  the  land,  at  once  lent  the  system  a  peculiar 
and  lofty  character ;  but  the  system  itself  as  a  religious  machinery 
was  borrowed  from  its  environments.  The  central  idea  which  per- 
vades the  entire  sacrificial  service  is  the  same  that  underlies  the 
Semitic,  if  not  primitive  religion  in  general,  and  that  is,  that  only 
blood  as  the  vital  power  of  man  and  beast  unites  and  reunites  men 
and  God.  Only  blood  possesses  the  power  of  atonement  (see  Lev. 
xvii.  ii).  Only  blood  seals  a  covenant  and  reconciles  an  angry 
deity.  Only  the  signs  of  blood  protect  the  houses,  the  men  and  the 
flocks  against  malign  spirits.  Read  the  personal  observations  made 
in  Bible  lands  by  Prof.  Curtiss  in  his  "Primitive  Semitic  Religion" 
and  by  Clay  Trumbull  as  recorded  in  his  "Blood  Covenant"  and 
"The  Threshold  Covenant,"  and  you  have  the  key  to  many  religious' 
ceremonies  of  ancient  Israel.  New  light  is  there  thrown  upon  the 
twelfth  and  thirteenth  chapters  of  Exodus  which  treat  of  the  Pass- 
over lamb  whose  blood  is  sprinkled  upon  the  doorsill  and  doorposts 
and  of  the  sacrifice  of  the  firstborn  of  the  flock  and  the  herd  to- 
gether with  the  signs  upon  the  arm  and  the  forehead.  We  learn  of 
the  shepherds  of  Arabia  and  Palestine  offering  each  spring  at  the 
increase  of  their  flocks  and  herds  some  of  the  firstborn  as  a  sacrifice 
called  Fedu, — -the  same  as  Pidion,  "Redemption," — into  the  blood  of 
which  they  dip  the  hand  to  put  the  sign  of  "a  hand"  or  of  a  "Tau" 
(cross)  upon  the  doorsill  and  upon  the  forehead  of  men  and  sprinkle 
some  upon  the  flock  and  the  herd  to  avert  ill-luck  or  to  insure  the 


divine  blessing.  So  is  every  new  household  opened  by  a  moving" 
tribe,  or  by  a  newly  married  couple,  consecrated  by  sacrificial  blood 
warding  off  evil  spirits  that  may  beleaguer  it.  So  is  every'  grievous 
sin  committed  ransomed  off  by  such  sacrificial  rite. 

Likewise  is  the  life  of  a  child  in  cases  of  sickness  or  distress 
dedicated  to  the  local  saint,  bought  off  by  the  sacrifice  of  a  lamb  or 
goat,  and  in  case  of  poverty  also  by  a  rooster  or  hen.  We  thus  find 
the  closest  similarity  between  the  practices  mentioned  in  the  Bible 
and  those  still  in  use  in  the  Bible  lands.  Also  in  regard  to  the  fes- 
tivities of  the  ingathering  and  the  firstlings  of  the  yearly  produce. 
As  Maimonides,  in  the  third  book  of  his  Moreh,  has  suggested  with 
fine  divinatory  powers,  it  was  the  method  of  a  wise  pedagogy  which 
either  made  use  of  pagan  rites  to  train  the  people  of  Israel  for 
higher  religious  views  and  habits,  or  so  transformed  the  ancient 
practices  as  to  guard  the  people  against  lapsing  into  heathen  vice 
and  cruelty. 

We  must  bear  in- mind  that  antiquity  knew  of  no  other  form  of 
worship  than  sacrifice.  However  bitterly  the  great  prophets  in  Israel 
condemned  the  heathen  mode  of  bribing  deity  by  the  blood  and  the 
oil  poured  upon  the  altar  while  Israel's  God  demanded  righteous 
conduct,  they  could  not  abrogate  the  sacrificial  cult.  Nor  did  they 
intend  doing  so.  They  did  not  accord  to  prayer  and  song  a  higher, 
place  in  the  service.  Even  the  great  seer  of  the  Exile,  when  giving 
utterance  to  the  glorious  vision  of  the  time  when  the  house  of  God 
wt)uld  become  a  house  of  prayer  for  all  the  nations,  still  beholds 
the  pillars  of  smoke  rising  from  an  altar  decked  with  holocausts  and 
other  blood  offerings.  And  so  does  the  incense  of  sacrifice  offered 
to  God  from  the  rising  of  the  sun  unto  its  setting  betoken  to  the  last 
of  the  Prophets  the  universality 'of  religion.  Only  the  Hasidean 
Psalms  xi  and  1  echo  forth  the  clear  note  of  dissent,  ushering  in 
a  new  era  of  religious  life  during  the  Exile,  as  we  shall  see.  In  the 
Mosaic  system  the  priestly  ritual,  dominant  in  all  sanctuaries,  is  the 
only  legitimate  one.  Prayer,  and  confession  of  sin  are  admitted  as 
occasional  outpourings  of  the  individual,  yet  only  at  the  (niter  parts 
of  the  sanctuary.  Even  the  inspiring  song  and  music  of  Levitical 
choirs  find  no  place,  or  mention,  alongside  of  the  primitive  horn 
(Shofar)  and  trumpet. 


In  all  likelihood  this  simplicity  is  intentional.  It  was  to  form  a 
striking  contrast  to  the  seductive  orgies  of  the  Canaanite.  This 
would  also  account  for  the  strange  lack  of  ceremonial  prescribed  for- 
the  different  holy  days.  Only  the  old  shepherd  festival  of  spring, 
Pesah,  transformed  into  a  memorial  feast  of  the  Exodus  has  a  more 
elaborate  ritual.  The  three  agricultural  festivals  still  appear  in  a 
rather  shadowy  form  except  in  so  far  as  the  number  of  sacrifices 
is  concerned.  Obviously,  the  lawgiver  is  concerned  only  with  the 
regulation  of  the  official  cult.  As  .to  the  popular  festivities,  we  only 
learn  that  the  poor,  the  widow  and  the  orphan,  the  stranger  and 
the  Levite  were  to  participate  in  the  joy  of  the  harvest  and  vintage 
and  to  receive  the  corners  of  the  field  at  the  ingathering  of  the  crops. 
From  other  sources,  especially  from  comparative  studies  of  religious 
practices,  we  learn  that  certain  portions  of  the  field  were  conse- 
crated by  the  people  to  the  gods  of  fertility  amidst  religious  pro- 
cessions of  a  half  lascivious  and  half  austere  character ;  and  we  at 
once  comprehend  the  meaning  and  the  high  ethical  purpose  of  the 
Mosiac  law  assigning  the  corners  of  the  fields  to  the  poor.  Also 
in  regard  to  the  Sukkoth  festival  and  the  palm,  myrtle  and  willow 
branches  specified  in  connection  therewith,  there  are  several  indica- 
tions in  Scriptural  passages  that  the  festivities  of  the  water  libation 
held  in  the  second  temple  originated  in  ancient  times ;  only  the 
priestly  legislation  had  no  interest  in  a  public  ceremonial  outside  of 
the  sanctuary. 

In  the  Atonement  Day  ceremonial  we  have  a  peculiar  combination 
of  a  primitive  Semitic  and  a  purely  monotheistic  rite  of  expiation. 
The  scapegoat  sent  out  to  Azazel,  the  goat-like  demon  of  the  wilder- 
ness, as  Ibn  Ezra  sagaciously  explained  the  name,  belongs  to  the 
same  category  as  the  bird  sent  out  to  carry  the  disease  of  the  leper 
into  the  wilderness  (Lev.  xiv.  53)  and  has  many  analogies  in  an- 
cient Semitic  usages  (see  Robertson  Smith  "Religion  of  the  Sem- 
ites," p.  402  note,  and  comp.  Orclli  "Religionsgeschichte"  p.  760 ; 
and  art.  Azazel  in  J.  E.).  This  archaic  rite  meant  for  the  inhabitants 
of  Jerusalem  originally  the  removal  of  physical  evil  for  the  new 
solar  year  (xi.  i  and  comp.  Lev.  xxv.  9-10).  The  priesthood, 
on  the  other  hand,  expatiated  on  the  rites  of  expiation  for  the  sane- 


tuary,  the  effects  of  which  only  indirectly  affected  the  people  for 
whom  the  day  was  made  a  fast  day.  The  whole  ritual  has  an  exclu- 
sively hierarchical  character  which  was  changed  only  at  the  hands  of 
the  Pharisees  in  their  combat  with  Sadduceeism.  These  only  gave 
it  the  character  of  a  grand  symbolic  act  of  purification  and  divine 
atonement. 

The  only  day  which  stands  out  as  a  genuine  Jewish  institution 
without  parallel  in  paganism  is  the  Sabbath.  It  is  emphatically  de- 
clared to  be  the  sign  of  the  covenant  between  God  and  Israel  (Exod. 
xxxi.  16-17).  Unlike  the  Babylonian  Sabbath  which  figures  as 
a  day  of  austere  stand-still  for  the  royal  representative  of  the  na- 
tion, the  Mosaic  Sabbath  is  a  day  of  rest  and  recreation  for  the 
whole  nation,  including  the  slave,  the  stranger  and  the  beast.  It  is 
a  testimonial  to  God  as  the  Creator  of  the  Universe  as  well  as  the 
Liberator  of  man.  Still  a  ceremonial  of  a  positive  kind  is  prescribed 
only  for  the  priest  who,  besides  the  additional  sacrifice,  places  the 
new  shew-bread  upon  the  golden  table  each  Sabbath  day  while  tak- 
ing home  the  old  (Lev.  xxiv.  8-9). 

As  the  great  Memorial  day  of  the  deliverance  from  Egypt,  the 
Passover  feast  also  occupies  a  central  position  in  the  Mosaic  num- 
ber of  holy  days.  Many  ceremonies  cluster  around  it  to  become  re- 
minders of  important  religious  and  ethical  laws,  the  unleavened 
bread  of  primitive  time  (See  Tylor's  "Anthropology,"  p.  267)  having 
been  rendered  symbolic  of  the  hastened  exodus  of  Israel  from  the 
land  of  bondage. 

There  remain  for  discussion,  then,  those  ceremonies  particularly 
enjoined  as  signs  for  the  body.  The  most  important  of  these  is  the 
sign  of  the  Abrahamitic  covenant.  Here,  too,  the  pedagogical  tend- 
ency of  the  Mosaic  law  becomes  evident  as  soon  as  we  compare  the 
rite  prescribed  in  Genesis  xvii.  iif.  with  the  one  in  use  among  all 
the  other  tribes  in  Arabia,  Africa  and  Australia,  and  find  traces  of 
the  older  primitive  form  also  in  ancient  Biblical  time.  I  refer  to 
the  stone  knives  used  by  Zipporah  and  Joshua  which,  as  shown  by 
Tylor  ("Early  History,"  217)  point  to  a  cruder  age,  and  to  the 
connection  of  the  rite  with  marriage  in  the  story  of  Shechem  (Gen. 
xxxiv).     It   is  the   consecration   of   manhood   at    the    approach    of 

10 


puberty  and  before  marriage  that  is  intended  by  the  practice  in 
primitive  life,  and  the  painful  ordeal  becomes  a  test  for  the  youth, 
as  in  similar  savage  customs.  Obviously  in  assigning  the  tenderest 
age  of  infancy  as  the  time  for  the  performance  of  the  rite,  when 
the  pain,  or  consciousness  of  pain,  is  minimized,  whereas  Ishmael, 
the  father  of  the  Beduin  tribe,  is  circumcised  at  thirteen  years  of 
age,  the  act  is  elevated  to  the  dignity  of  a  solemn  initiation  of  the 
child  into  the  Abrahamitic  household.  The  solemnization  of  the  act 
by  a  public  festivity,  however,  as  is  done  by  the  Moslem  who  calls  it 
"the  feast  of  purification"  (comp.  Joshua  v.  9  and  the  art.  Cir- 
cumcision in  the  J.  E.)  came  into  use  only  in  post-Biblical  time. 
Whether  the  Deutcronomist  (Deut.  x.  16;  xxx.  6;  compare  Jere- 
miah iv.  4  and  ix.  24),  in  symbolizing  the  rite  accepts  the  view 
of  the  priestly  Code  or  deprecates  it,  is  a  matter  open  to  controversy. 
There  is  no  doubt,  however,  that  the  idea  of  the  Blood-Covenant 
prevailed  also  in  relation  to  this  rite,  as  may  be  learned  from  its 
relation  to  the  Passover  feast  (Exod.  xii.  44-48).  And  this  leads 
us  to  the  "sign"  on  the  hand  and  between  the  eyes  mentioned  in 
this  connection  in  Exod.  xiii.  9  and  16.  Rabbinical  tradition  re- 
fers this  to  the  Phylacteries  introduced  in  post-Biblical  time.  But 
Samaritan  practice  to  this  very  day  helps  to  elucidate  the  passage. 
The  blood  of  the  Passover-lamb  slaughtered  on  Mount  Gerizim  is 
put  on  the  arm  and  the  forehead  of  the  children,  as  has  been  wit- 
nessed by  Petermann  "Reisen  in  Orient"  I,  137;  Stanley  "Eastern 
Church"  I,  561  and  others.  Out  of  such  custom  which  has  talis- 
manic  cliaractcr,  the  Tefillin  or  Phylacteries  developed,  just  as  the 
Mezuzzah  grew  out  of  the  other  talismanic  practice  of  bedaubing  the 
doors  with  blood  in  the  shape  of  a  hand  and  the  like.  The  Deute- 
ronomic  law-giver  (vi.  8-9;  xi.  18-20)  suggests  by  way  of  symbol- 
ism "  the  binding  of  the  words  of  the  Law  on  arm  and  forehead 
and  the  inscription  of  the  same  on  the  doorposts,"  a  practice  met 
with  among  Moslems  today  and  among  Christians  of  old ;  and  this 
became  a  fixed  ceremonial  law,  although  the  talismanic  character  of 
both  the  Tefillin  and  Mezuzzah  is  occasionally  alluded  to  in  the 
Targum  and  the  Talmud  (see  my  article  in  "Monatschrift,"  1893,  p. 
445  f.).  The  Zizith,  too,  which  in  Deut.  xxii.  12,  appear  to  be 
merely  enjoined  as  a  lesson  of  public  decorum,  are  in  the  Holiness 

11 


Code  (Numbers  xv.  37-41)  prescribed  as  a  ceremonial  practice  of 
a  religious  nature,  though  the  talismanic  character  of  the  purple  blue 
thread  upon  the  fringes  is  generally  assumed  by  modern  commenta- 
tors and  seemingly  confirmed  by  Talmudic  utterances.  (See  Tosif- 
ta  Berakot  at  the  close  and  Midrash  Tehillim  to  Psalm  vi.) 

A  real  consecration  of  the  entire  people  of  Israel  as  God's  holy 
priest-nation  is  expressed  in  the  dietary  laws,  the  priestly  origin 
and  character  of  which  cannot  be  doubted  by  the  student  of  com- 
parative religion.  Whether  R.  Smith's  theory  of  the  totemitic  sig- 
nificance of  the  unclean,' or  tabooed,  animals,  be  accepted  or  not, 
the  fact  that  the  laws  of  the  Hindoos,  of  the  Persians,  the  Babylon- 
ians and  the  Egyptians  forbade  the  same  classes  of  animals  to  the 
priesthood  and  that  the  Mosaic  Code  itself  takes  it  for  granted  that 
the  distinction  between  the  clean  and  the  unclean  animals  dates 
back  to  the  oldest,  the  Noahidic,  times  (Gen.  vii.  2),  proves  that 
the  underlying  principle  is  not  a  social  or  hygienic  but  a  specifically 
religious  one  as  stated  (Lev.  xi.  44;  xx.  25  f . ;  Exod.  xxii.'so; 
Deut.  xiv.  21  comp.  Ezek.  xiiv.  31  and  Judges  xiii.  4;  and  the 
art.  Dietary  Laws  in  J.  E.).  It  is  the  great  legislative  attempt  to 
carry  into  practical  effect  the  prophetical  idea  expressed  at  the  Sinai- 
tic  Revelation:  "Ye  shall  be  unto  Me  a  kingdom  of  priests  and  a 
holy  nation."  It  was,  however,  on  a  higher  stage,  in  a  more  con- 
genial religious  atmosphere  that  this  great  plan  could  be  brought 
nearer  to  its  realization,  and  this  was  the  period  of  Hasidean  or 
Pharisaic  and  Rabbinical  Judaism. 

2.     The  Ceremonies  of  Pharisaic  and  Rabbinical  Judaism 

The  difference  in  the  religious  life  between  pre-Exilic  and  post- 
Exilic  Israel  is  so  marked  and  so  amazingly  great  that  the  rabbis 
could  account  for  it  only  by  the  legend  that  the  founders  of  the 
Synagogue,  "the  Men  of  the  great  Assembly,"  had  seized  the  Yezer 
ha  Ra  by  magic  and  exterminated  him  from  the  earth  so  as  to  make 
an  end  to  the  idolatrous  propensities  of  the  people  (Yoma  69b; 
Sanh.  64a).  The  fact  is  that  with  the  rise  of  Persia  a  new  spirit 
entered  the  world  and  brought  about  a  great  change  especially 
among  the  Jewish  exiles.      The  higher  conception  of  deity  which 

12 


lent  to  life  in  general  a  moral  purpose,  though  based  on  dualism, 
demanded  of  the  Parsee  a  purer  form  of  worship.  The  rising  ^nd 
setting  sun,  the  waning  and  waxing  moon,  the  various  phenomena 
of  nature  presenting  the  combat  of  light  with  darkness,  and  of  life 
with  death,  were  greeted  with  invocations  and  prayers  rather  than 
with  bloody  sacrifice.  The  sensual  worship  of  the  lascivious  Baby- 
lonian deities  made  way  for  an  adoration  of  the  god  of  light  whose 
heavenly  court  appeared  as  the  prototype  of  the  court  of  the  Persian 
King  of  Kings.  Again  it  is  the  principle  of  assimilation  which  is 
at  work  in  the  shaping  of  the  Jewish  religion.  Alongside  of  the 
temple  with  its  sacrificial  cult  attended  to  by  the  Sadducean  hier- 
archy, the  Synagogue  arises  as  a  new  centre  of  religious  life  created 
by  "the  humble"  or  "pious  ones,"  the  saints  of  the  people,  impreg- 
nated with  the  prophetic  truths  and  echoing  forth  their  lofty  aspira- 
tions in  the  psalms  and  then  in  a  liturgy  shaped  after  Parsee  models. 
An  intense,  religious  enthusiasm  which  finds  its  resonance  in  the 
people's  heart  is  awakened  by  these  Hasidim,  of  the  type  of  Daniel, 
and  expresses  itself  in  ceremonies  of  a  far  higher  order  than  is  the 
priestly  ritual.  The  latest  writer  on  the  Jewish  liturgy,  Dr.  EUbogen 
in  the  "Monatschrift"  is  quite  at  a  loss  to  explain  the  origin  of  the 
recital  of  the  Shema  witli  the  preceding  benediction  praising  the 
Creator  for  the  light  of  day  and  Israel's  Only  One  for  the  light  of 
the  Torah.  Yet  Rappaport  and  Schorr,  as  I  indicated  in  my  article 
above  referred  to,  pointed  out  the  way  of  tracing  it  to  Parsee  influ- 
ence. It  was  not  imitation,  as  our  anti-Reformers  would  say,  but 
assimilation  that  prompted  this  and  many  other  great  improvements 
upon  the  old  priestly  cult.  Yes,  the  Anshe  Kneseth  ha  Gedolah,  the 
founders  of  the  Synagogue,  were  reformers  in  adopting  the  Parsee 
ceremony  of  greeting  the  orb  of  light  at  its  rise  every  morning  and 
every  evening  at  its  setting;  but  whereas  the  worshipers  of 
Ormuzd  with  their  magic  formula  hailed  the  sun  as  deity,  the  Hasi- 
dim invoked  God  as  the  Creator  of  Light  and  Darkness,  expressly 
accentuating  the  monotheistic  doctrine  in  contradiction  to  the  dual- 
ism of  Persia.  I  cannot  here  go  further  into  detail.  Let  me  merely 
call  your  attention  to  the  fact  again  overlooked  by  Dr.  Ellbogen, 
that,  in  order  to  give  expression  in  due  form  to  "the  acceptance  of 
the  yoke  of  God's  Kingship"— Kabbalath  Ol  Malkut  Shamayim,  as 

13 


is  the  term  for  the  Shema  recital — the  ceremony  of  putting  on  the 
TefilHn  and  of  wrapping  the  head  into  the  Zizith  (ornamented  shawl 
or  Tallith) — were  made  regular  parts  of  the  morning  prayer,  for 
which  also  the  Parsee  custom  offers  an  analogy.  In  fact,  most  of  the 
morning  benedictions  are  adaptations  from  the  Parsee  ceremonial. 
I  will  single  out  the  one  recited  at  the  crowing  of  the  cock,  the  sacred 
messenger  of  the  god  of  light.  The  solemn  greeting  of  the  new 
moon  is  undoubtedly  also  an  adaptation  of  a  Parsee  practice  to  the 
Jewish  faith.  Nay  more.  As  has  been  shown  convincingly  in  the 
seventh  and  eighth  volumes  of  Schorr's  "He  Haluz,"  the  whole 
Pharisaic  principle  of  investing  life  with  ceremonial  observances 
and  corresponding  benedictions  is  taken  over  from  Parseeism. 

The  leading  idea  of  the  epoch  ushered  in  by  the  Persian  dominion 
was  the  assertion  of  the  right  of  the  individual  in  the  religious  life 
of  the  nation.  And  of  this  the  Synagogue  became  the  powerful  ex- 
ponent, revolutionizing  religion  by  instituting  in  place  of  the  sacri- 
ficial priestly  pomp  a  simple  service  fervent  with  true  devotion  and 
rich  in  instruction  to  appeal  to  all  hearts.  God  stepped,  as  it  were, 
out  of  the  darkness  of  the  Holy  of  Holies,  to  which  only  the  elect  of 
the  priesthood  had  access  once  a  year,  into  the  full  daylight  of  rea- 
son and  knowledge  to  become  in  reality  the  God  and  Father  of  all. 
The  Torah  in  the  hand  of  the  scribe,  the  teacher  and  preacher  was 
to  become  the  property  of  all ;  and  around  the  ark  containing  it  and 
the  desk  from  which  it  was  read  and  expounded  to  the  congregation, 
sprang  up  ceremonies  full  of  meaning  and  impressiveness.  The 
Torah  lent  to  the  Sabbath  and  holy  days  a  significance  they  could 
not  have  had  in  ancient  Israel;  it  gave  to  each  season  of  the  circling 
years  a  new  charm  and  rhythm.  Out  of  the  heart  of  the  religious 
community  blossomed  forth  the  ideas  which  transformed  the  three 
agricultural  feasts  and  the  feast  of  the  temple  expiation  on  the  tenth 
of  Tishri  with  its  herald,  the  day  of  the  Shofar  blowing,  into  the 
great  awakeners  of  religious  thought  and  sentiment,  and  around 
each  there  began  to  cluster  specific  ceremonies  of  soul-stirring 
beauty  and  grandeur. 

But  here,  too,  we  must  not  lose  sight  of  the  historic  law  of  evolu- 
tion.    It  is  always  the  few  elect  who  usher  in  new  ideas.     Such,  in 

14 


the  epoch  we  are  speaking-  of,  were  the  Pharisean  brotherhoods 
which,  in  reclaiming'  for  their  assemblies  the  sanctity  of  the  priest- 
hood guaranlccd  to  Israel  in  the  preamble  of  the  Sinai  Constitu- 
tion, gave  a  new  solemnity  to  their  Sabbath  and  holy  day  meals  by 
the  Kiddush  and  Habdalah  ceremony,  made  the  Passover  night 
resonant  with  tlic  joyous  strains  of  the  Plagg-adah,  transformed  the 
farmer's  feast  of  the  firstlings  into  a  memorial  day  of  Sinai  and 
created  the  great  autumnal  season  of  religious  revival  for  the  Jew. 
The  daily  meals  were  also  lifted  out  of  the  common-place  and  in- 
vested with  priestly  holiness  by  these  brotherhoods.  Seated  around 
a  common  table  they  began  and  finished  with  benedictions  and  other 
ceremonies  in  imitation  of  temple  practice  and  that  of  other  reli- 
gious fraternities.  In  like  manner,  social  events,  such  as  weddings 
and  funerals,  or  the  initiation  of  youths  into  the  study  and  practice 
of  the  Torah,  the  Bar  Mizwah  celebration,  were  made  specific  reli- 
gious solemnities.  (See  art.  Bar  Mizwah;  Benedictions,  Essenes 
and  Pharisees  in  the  J.  E.)  Gradually  a  new  factor  of  religious 
life  enters  and  opens  a  new  sphere,  for  ceremonial  observance. 
Woman  as  builder  and  guardian  of  the  home  is  more  and  more 
recognized,  and  the  rigor  of  the  Mosaic  purity  laws  as  well  as  the 
austerity  of  the  Hasidean  saint  gives  way  to  the  dictates  of  common 
sense.  Henceforth  the  Jewish  home  is  emblazoned  and  enriched 
with  new  ceremonies  which  accord  to  woman  a  prominent  place  in 
religious  life.  The  kindling  of  the  Sabbath  lamp  and  the  baking  of 
the  Sabbath  bread,  and  the  like,  invest  domestic  life  with  new  means 
of  sanctification.  In  the  same  measure  as  the  Jew  withdraws  from 
the  political  arena  to  form  an  exclusively  religious  community  in 
the  midst  of  the  nations,  his  life  from  the  cradle  to  the  grave  be- 
comes a  round  of  ceremonial  observances  distinguishing  it  from 
his  surroundings.  Yet  as  the  real  purpose  and  origin  of  all  these 
rites  and  ceremonies  are  forgotten,  the  impression  obtaing  that  sepa- 
ration, distinction  of  the  Jew  from  the  non-Jew,  is  the  sole  object, 
and  non-Jewish  habits,  even  of  the  most  innocent  kind,  are  con- 
demned as  included  in  the  Mosaic  prohibition  of  Hukkat  ha  Goy. 
which  refers  only  to  the  lewd  practices  of  the  i(k)latrous  nations. 

But  such  is  the  power  of  assimilation  working  unconsciously  in 

15 


Judaism  that  almost  every  age  and  country  added  customs  and  cere- 
monies of  pagan  origin  and  superstitious  character.  Such  a  one 
is  the  rite  of  Kapparoth,  the  waiving  and  slaughtering  of  a  cock, 
respectively  hen,  for  males  and  females,  on  the  eve  of  Yom  Kippur, 
a  sort  of  vicarious  sacrifice  met  with  also  among  Mohammedans  and 
likewise  the  ransoming  of  the  dangerously  sick,  "Pidyon  ha  Nefesh"' 
(see  Curtiss,  "Eodem"  28,  233). 

The  rites  connected  with  marriage,  birth  and  death  present  a 
strange  combination  of  ancient  Oriental  and  Occidental  practices. 
The  wine  and  the  benedictions  at  the  wedding  date  from  the  time 
when  the  sacrificial  meal  cemented  the  matrimonial  covenant  (see 
Clay  Trumbull,  "The  Blood  Covenant"  and  Tobit  viii.  5),  whereas 
the  ring  as  a  symbol  is  a  mediaeval  innovation.  Few  people  are 
aware  that  the  bridal  veil,  which  lent  the  name  to  the  Roman  nup- 
tials, is  but  a  survival  of  the  cutting-off  of  the  bride's  hair,  a  prac- 
tice still  adhered  to  in  Russia  among  Jews  and  Gentiles  (see  Lip- 
pert  "Cultusgeschichte"  II,  125,  155  f.  and  Ralston  "Russian  Folk 
Songs,"  27  f.).  So  has  the  Rabbinical  prohibition  to  have  wed- 
dings take  place  in  holy  seasons  its  parallel  in  Roman  custom  (see 
Lippert,  p.  99),  while  the  forbidding  of  weddings  during  the  Omer 
days  corresponds  to  the  Roman  and  English  avoidance  of  May  wed- 
dings.    (See  Landberg  in  Geiger's  "Zeitschr,"  1869  p.  81  ff.) 

The  solemnizing  of  the  Berith  Milah  is  neither  Biblical  nor  Tal- 
mudical  but  was  apparently  adopted  from  the  Mohammendans  among 
whom  also  the  Rabbinical  festivity  of  the  Shebua  ha  Ben,  "the 
seventh  day  of  the  child"  is  found.  (Comp.  Klunzinger  "Bilder  aus 
Ober  Aegypten,"  1877,  p.  181  f. ;  Lane  "Customs  of  the  Egyptians 
of  To-day,"  III,  138,  German  Translation,  with  Baba  Bathra  6Db 
and  Loew's  "Lebensalter.")  Especially  interesting  is  the  adoption  of 
the  feast  of  Naming  the  Child,  from  the  Germans  under  the  heathen 
name  of  Holle  Kreisch  for  the  daughter,  obviously  for  the  reason 
that  Oriental  tradition  had  made  no  provision  for  this  family  event 
(see  Pedes  in  "Graetz  Jubelschrift"  p.  24).  Especialy  large  is  the 
number  of  practices  adopted  by  the  Jew  from  his  surroundings  in 
the  event  of  death.  Superstition,  deisidaemonia,  "fear  of  the  dem- 
ons" as  the  Greeks  call  it,  is  the  child  of  fear.     Most  funeral  rites 

16 


were  originally  means  of  pacifying  the  dead  who  claimed  their  part 
from  the  living.  Out  of  the  sacrifices  to  the  dead,  transformed 
later  into  sacrifices  for  the  dead,  developed  all  the  rites  and  pray- 
ers that  at  a  more  advanced  stage  became  sources  of  comfort  for  the 
living.  .The  ancient  fear  died  away  and  piety  stepped  into  its  place 
to  preserve  the  old  customs  in  a  new  garb  and  in  a  new  spirit. 
There  is  nothing -that  so  appeals  to  the  Jew  with  his  innate  love  for 
the  fathers  who  sleep  in  the  dust  as  does  the  Kaddish  and  the  Yahr- 
aeit.  Yet  both  have  their  origin  in  fear,  fear  of  the  purgatory  and 
fear  lest  the  unlucky  day  again  brings  death.  They  have  obtained 
a  prominent  place  in  Jewish  life,  though  their  origin  and  character 
are  un-Jewish  ;  not  Christian,  as  Zunz  says,  but  Persian  and  Baby- 
lonian. 

In  thus  reviewing  the  entire  system  of  Jewish  observances  as  they 
have  come  down  to  us  through  the  centuries,  we  find  them  to  be 
indispensable  forms  of  expressing  the  religious  feelings  prompted 
by  the  various  events  of  life.  As  we  advance  in  culture,  enlighten- 
ment and  refinement,  these  various  ceremonies  may  appear  to  us 
as  empty  shells  void  of  meaning,  but  we  must  never  forget  that 
nothing  grows  on  the  tree  or  in  the  soil  without  the  shielding  leaf 
and  husk.  Abstract  truth  and  ethical  practice  fail  to  satisfy  the 
religious  craving  of  man.  He  needs  ceremonies  that  impress  him 
with  the  nearness  and  the  holiness  of  the  divine.  And  while  the 
Mosaic  Code  placed  the  sanctuary  and  the  priesthood  into  the  fore- 
ground, often  ignoring  the  life  of  the  people,  we  see  Pharisaic  and 
Rabbinic  Judaism  creating  new  ceremonies  or  transforming  the  old 
so  as  to  impress  the  Jew  on  all  occasions  with  his  priestly  sanctity. 
He  rejoices  in  the  multitude  of  observances  which  surround  his 
life  like  so  many  guardian  angels.  Unlike  his  Christian  neighbor, 
who  from  fear  of  the  Satanic  powers  of  evil  surrenders  to  blind 
dogma,  he  sees  his  path  of  life  lined  with  ceremonies  which  secure 
to  him  the  divine  favor. 

The  question  for  us  today,  however,  is:  Can  these  ceremonies  of 
traditional  Judaism  still  occupy  the  same  place  in  our  life?  True, 
they  have  accomplished  much  for  the  Jew  of  the  past  in  ofifering  a 
wondrous  discipline  which  drilled  him  to  do  soldier's  duty  in  defend- 

17 


ing  the  ancestral  inheritance  and  in  shunning-  no  sacrifice  to  uphold 
it  against  a  world  of  bitterest  enmity  and  intolerance.  Still,  thev 
have  long  ceased  to  impress  us  with  the  idea  of  priestly  holiness  and 
have  become  "the  work  of  men  inculcated  by  rote."  Rabbinical 
ceremonialism  has  become  as  unbearable  to  us  as  the  sacrificial  sacer- 
dotalism was  to  the  prophets  of  old.  It  is  just  as  much  fetishism  for 
us  to  wear  the  Tallith  and  the  TefiUin,  tliough  the  Talmud  consigns 
the  head  not  adorned  by  Tefillin  to  Gehenna  (Rosh  Hashanah  17a), 
as  to  have  the  Aaronides  still  chant  the  Priestly  Blessing  in  the  Syn- 
agogue. The  dietary  and  purity  laws,  whether  Mosaic  or  Rabbini- 
cal, are  dead  and  buried  for  us,  and  no  power  in  the  world  can  re- 
suscitate them.  And  this  is  the  case  with  many  other  ceremonial 
institutions  deemed  fundamental  by  the  law-observing  Orthodox. 
We  cannot  shut  our  eyes  to  the  fact  that,  as  our  entire  Weltan- 
schauung changes,  so  must  our  religious  views  necessarily  change. 
In  order  to  have  a  positive  religious  value  and  significance,  cere- 
monies must  either  directly  or  symbolically  express  thoughts  and  feel- 
ings that  appeal  to  us  while  elevating,  hallowing  and  enriching  our 
lives.  Romanticism  which  only  loves  ancient  practices  because  they 
are  picturesque  representations  of  a  dead  past  is  not  religion,  which 
must  above  all  be  the  voice  of  a  living  truth,  of  a  living  God. 

3.     The  Ceremonies  of  Modern  Jud.\ism 

Before  discussing  the  need  and  the  function  of  ceremonies  in 
modern  Judaism,  we  must  be  clear  as  to  what  we  would  call  Modern, 
or  as  it  is  commonly  termed.  Reform  Judaism.  To  most  people, 
some  of  our  Reform  Rabbis  included,  Reform  appears  as  something 
arbitrary,  as  a  sort  of  eclecticism  which  singles  out  such  of  the 
laws  and  institutions  of  Judaism  for  observance  as  appeal  to  reason 
and  common  sense  and  suit  our  convenience,  more  or  less,  while 
disregarding  or  rejecting  the  rest.  Moreover,  they  find  it  to  be 
paradoxical  to  disclaim  the  authority  of  the  written  and  oral  Law 
and  at  the  same  time  lay  claim  to  loyalty  to  the  Torah  as  divine 
revelation.  It  is  unquestionably  this  very  perplexity  which  has  in- 
duced many  Reformers  to  seek  refuge  in  Nationalism.  The  fact  is, 
Reform  Judaism  is  just  as  much  the  necessary  outcome  of  our  his- 


torical  age  of  research  as  was  Rabbinism  the  result  of  bhnd  belief 
in  authority.  The  principle  of  evolution  offers  us  the  key  so  to  re- 
read the  past  as  to  enable  us  to  see  its  continuity  in  the  present,  no 
matter  what  changes  altered  conditions  have  brought  about.  Look- 
ing beneath  the  surface  of  the  letter  and  the  form,  we  find  the  same 
laws  that  have  been  at  work  both  in  the  Mosaic  and  in  the  Rabbinic 
period  of  Judaism  to  be  still  at  work  in  the  modern  epoch  ;  only 
with  the  essential  difference  that  in  the  former  stages  the  work  was 
(lone  by  unconscieais  forces  of  the  Jewish  genius  for  which  the  reli- 
gious terminology  is  revelation  and  inspiration,  God  working 
through  the  chosen  organs  and  authorities,  whereas  in  our  age  of 
reason  the  religious  progress  is  achieved  by  us  in  resix)nsc  to  the 
dictates  of  our  own  religious  consciousness.  The  recognition  of 
the  fact  that  both  Mosaism  and  Pharisaism  have  been  borrowing 
and  adopting  forms  of  religious  practice  from  their  surroundings  in 
the  shaping  and  reshaping  of  the  religious  life  of  the  Jewish  people, 
entitles  us  to  pursue  the  same  method  of  the  remodelling  of  the  pres- 
ent Judaism  in  order  to  revitalize  and  quicken  its  forces.  Of  course, 
innovations  and  reforms  at  first  militate  against  the  justly  venerated 
authority  of  the  past,  and  it  requires  a  successive  period  of  tacit  as- 
sent to  legitimize  them  and  render  them  integral  parts  of  the  whole 
system  of  religion.  No  doubt,  to  the  prophet  Elijah  as  well  as  to 
Hosea  xii.  lo  th^  Solomonic  Temple  with  all  its  sacerdotal  pomp 
appeared  as  an  imitation  and  assimilation  of  Phoenician  worship, 
while  in  the  priestly  Code  this  very  sacerdotal  cult  is  represented 
as  divinely  patterned.  Exactly  so  will  much  that  is  now  decried 
as  Christianizaticn  by  our  short-sighted  retrogressionists,  viz. : 
our  Reform  temple  with  its  organ  and  female  singers,  its  family 
pew's  and  all  its  Occidental  characteristics,  receive  its  full  acknowl- 
edgment as  Jewish  by  coming  generations  who  will  no  longer  know 
of  the  former  dissent.  Each  age  creates  its  own  divine  authorities, 
is  the  maxim  voiced  in  the  Rabbinical  saying:  "Jephtha  the  Judge 
in  his  age  is  the  same  as  Samuel  the  prophet  in  his."  Life  is  bound 
to  assimilate  forms  as  well  as  ideas  and  will  sanction  such  assimila- 
tions as  have  strengthened  and  vitalized  the  religious  idea. 

Now  there  can  be  no  question  as  to  the  need  of  ceremonial  prac- 
tices in  our  age.  Doctrine  alone,  however  lofty,  does  not  stir  the 

19 


soul  and  bring  it  in  touch  with  the  great  Fountainhead  of  HoHness 
and  Love.  Rehgious  acts  do.  They  awaken  and  deepen,  as  Lazarus 
says  in  his  "Jewish  Ethics,"  the  sense  of  duty  in  us.  They  develop 
our  spiritual  faculties  because  they  appeal  to  our  emotional  nature. 
They  impress  us  with  the  holiness  of  life  much  more  than  abstract 
truth  can.  They  bring  all  the  lessons  of  religion  home  to  us  in 
striking,  persuasive  and  attractive  form.  The  skeptic  who  remains 
cold  when  he  hears  arguments,  however  convincing,  is  moved  to 
tears  when  some  ceremonial  act  brings  back  to  him  long-forgotten 
memories  roused  by  associations  of  thought  and  sentiment  con- 
nected therewith.  No  religion  can  be  without  such  memorial 
"signs ;"  least  of  all,  Judaism  with  its  wondrous  history  of  achieve- 
ment and  of  endurance.  Ceremonies  are  the  educators  and  moni- 
tors of  the  people  ;  they  speak  to  old  and  young,  to  sage  and  simple- 
minded  alike  the  language  of  faith,  of  hope  and  of  loyalty.  When 
the  Torah  scroll  in  its  time-honored  garb  of  splendor  is  held  forth 
before  the  assembled  congregation,  the  words :  "This  is  the  Law" 
resound  in  our  ear  and  heart  with  the  glorious  tale  of  the  centuries 
of  Jewish  heroism  and  martyrdom,  with  the  world-wide  message 
of  its  perennial  truth.  So  should  each  ceremony  be  another  appeal 
to  lofty  aim  and  noble  action.  It  comes  to  us  as  a  means  of  sanctifi- 
cation  of  life  and  of  consecration  to  duty.  Every  event  or  experi- 
ence in  life,  each  turning  point  in  nature  and  history  should  link 
mortal  man  to  the  throne  of  the  everlasting  King  and  invest  the 
commonest  incidents  of  daily  existence  with  the  dignity  of  divine 
service.  This  is  the  underlying  idea  of  ceremonial  law  in  Judaism, 
and  our  strenuous  age  of  worldly  ambition  and  greed  can  least'  af- 
ford to  be  without  this  educating  influence. 

The  question  is,  however,  in  how  far  do  our  inherited  religious 
practices  fulfill  this  aim  and  object?  There  is  no  dispute  among 
the  most  radical  that  the  Sabbath  and  festival  days  are  still  most 
potent  ceremonial  institutions  performing  the  function  of  educators 
for  the  Jewish  community,  the  home  and  -the  individual.  They  re- 
vive the  dormant  soul  of  the  Jew  ever  anew,  giving  rhythm,  pathos 
and  charm  to  the  life  of  all  and  each.  But,  then,  are  the  ceremonies 
connected  with  each  real  signs  and  testimonies  svmbolic  of  the  truths 


20 


they  are  to  convey?  Do  they  speak  an  inteUigible  language  to  the 
young  for  whom  they  are,  according  to  Scripture,  chiefly  intended? 
Here  is  the  place  where  Reform  has  to  step  in  and  render  the  old 
ceremonial  attractive,  suggestive,  and  impressive  for  the  new  gen- 
eration. We  all  realize  today  that  the  ceremonies  for  the  home  have 
not  received  sufficient  attention.  The  importance  of  hallowing  and 
enriching  the  Jewish  home  life  has  not  been  fully  appreciated. 
Dr.  Berkowitz  has  made  a  good  beginning  with  his  Sabbath  Eve 
Kiddush.  A  corresponding  Kiddush  ceremony  we  shall  soon  have 
for  each  of  the  holy  days,  something  similar  to  the  Passover  Hag- 
gadah.  But  there  is  no  need  of  stereotyped  traditional  formula. 
We  ought  to  create  fitting  expressions  of  the  ideas  suggested  by  the 
day.  It  is  unnecessary  to  say  that  the  older  generation  ought  to  rein- 
troduce the  beautiful  parental  blessing  at  'each  family  reunion  or 
Sabbath  and  holy  day  eve  to  render  the  whole  more  impressive.  It 
must  be  placed  to  the  credit  of  the  Reformers  that  the  ceremony  of 
the  kindling  of  the  Hanukkah  lights  has  been  revived  in  homes 
where  the  Christmas  tree  threatened  to  captivate  the  young  hearts 
and  lessen  their  pride  in  their  ancestral  faith.  Yet  much  more  ought 
to  be  done  by  us  to  awaken  the  sentiment  of  loyalty  and  love  in  the 
young  by  the  introduction  of  new  appropriate  forms  where  the  old 
ones  have  lost  their  impressiveness. 

At  present  we  need  means  of  strengthening  the  self-respect  of  the 
Jew,  of  arousing  his  Jewish  consciousness.  Especial  emphasis 
must  therefore  be  laid  upon  the  ties  that  bind  him  to  his  past  which 
alone  will  fill  his  soul  with  pride  in  his  great  heritage.  In  religion 
especially,  where  reverence  plays  so  prominent  a  role,  the  ancient 
institutions  must  be  treated  with  regard  and  awe,  and  as  long  as 
any  religious  observance  proves  helpful  it  should  be  retained.  We 
can  herein  learn  from  nature  never  to  cast  off  the  old  before  the  new 
is  strong  enough  to  weather  the  storms.  If  the  wholesome  effect 
made  by  ceremonies  upon  the  parents  is  observed  by  the  child,  they 
will  not  fail  to  work  by  the  mystery  of  sympathy  upon  the  latter  in 
the  plastic  time  of  youth.  Upon  the  much  neglected  home  of  the 
Jew,  then,  the  ceremonial  system  should  be  centred.  Religion  should 
stand  as  sponsor  at  the  naming  of  the  child  and  should  solemnize 

21 


each  important  event  in  the  hfe  of  the  household,  thus  rendering 
the  home  a  true  sanctuary,  and  father  and  mother  its  priest  and 
priestess,  as  of  yore.  Even  the  recital  of  the  Shema  each  morning 
and  evening  might  be  transformed  into  a  solemn  domestic  service 
to  leave  its  ennobling  and  hallowing  impression  upon  each  member 
of  the  household. 

We  must  bear  in  mind  that  we  are  in  a  great  transition  period. 
The  yoke-bearing  age  is  behind  us.  Formerly  the  ceremonies  were 
to  be  observed  as  divine  command ;  for  us  today  they  must  have  an 
intrinsic  value  in  order  to  be  of  binding  force.  Religion  must  first  of 
all  voice  the  innemiost  craving  of  the  human  soul  as  a  child  of  God. 
Ceremonies  which  assign  to  woman  an  inferior  rank  according  to 
Oriental  notions  are  out  of  place  with  us.  Reform  Judaism  recog- 
nizes woman  as  man's  equal  and  sees  in  her  deeper  emotional  nature. 
which  is  more  responsive  to  the  promptings  of  the  spirit,  the  real 
inspiring  influence  for  religious  life  in  the  household.  Accordingly 
all  the  ceremonies  in  the  domestic  life  today  should  be  Occidental 
rather  than  Oriental  in  form  and  character. 

In  this  connection  let  me  speak  of  the  Bar  Mizwah  ceremony  to 
which  many  Reform  Congregations  still  adhere.  By  so  doing  they 
ignore  the  plain  fact  that  the  calling  up  of  the  thirteen  year  old  lad 
to  read  from  the  Torah  is  a  mere  survival  of  the  calling  up  of  all 
the  members  of  the  congregation  to  the  Torah  reading.  The  orig- 
inal significance,  which  was  to  indicate  thereby  the  admission  of 
the  lad  into  the  membership  of  the  congregation,  has  been  forgotten 
and  consequently  the  usage  today  is  meaningless.  The  moment  the 
Oriental  notion  of  the  superiority,  of  man  over  woman  in  religious 
life  was  abandoned,  a  form  of  consecration  for  the  young  of  both 
sexes  was  instituted  in  its  place  and  the  beautiful  rite  of  confirma- 
tion was  adopted.  As  a  befitting  conclusion  of  many  years  of  reli- 
gious instruction  it  exerts  a  potent  influence  upon  the  young  Jews 
and  Jewesses,  while  it  has  lent  new  attractiveness  to  the  Shabuoth 
festival  wdiich  otherwise  lacked  a  specific  or  characteristic  ceremony 
in  traditional  Judaism.  Of  course,  it  ought  to  be  simple,  a  sincere 
outpouring  of  the  hearts  of  the  young ;  we  must  not  allow  it  to  de- 
generate into  an  empty  display.     Another  feature  in  our  religious 

22 


life  of  today  should  be  mentioned  here.  In  the  same  measure  as 
our  age  refuses  to  blindly  follow  the  past,  realizing  the  wide  differ- 
ence between  our  mode  of  thought  and  that  of  our  forbears,  the 
need  of  giving  fuller  expression  to  the  sentiment  of  piety  has  made 
itself  felt.  Greater  stress  than  in  former  days  is  laid  upon  the  reci- 
tal of  the  Kaddish  and  similar  tributes  of  affectionate  regard  for 
the  dead.  True,  such  emotional  piety  can  never  replace  true,  reli- 
gious sentiment.  Nevertheless  there  is  a  brighter  side  to  it  of  which 
account  must  be  taken.  The  crude  belief  in  resurrection  of  the  past 
which  has  been  the  source  of  fear  and  superstitious  practices,  has 
made  way  for  the  belief  in  the  immortality  of  the  soul.  And  this 
has  lent  new  solemnity  to  that  part  of  the  service  called  Commemora- 
tion of  the  Dead — a  liturgy  which,  while  emphasizing  in  classic 
form  the  inherited  trait  of  Jewish  reverence  and  piety  has  invested 
the  Yom  Kippur  with  new  luster  for  the  Jew  of  today. 

But  above  all  the  Jewish  religion  must  be  presented  as  a  factor 
of  life  in  humanity's  work,  in  order  to  win  all  hearts  today.  It  must 
accentuate  the  universal,  the  human  and  the  practical  side  of  life. 
It  must  train  man  for  the  service  of  mankind.  By  this  stand- 
ard alone  is  religion  judged  and  estimated.  Will  Judaism  be 
found  inferior  to  other  religions  before  the  forum  of  humanity? 
This  ethical  concept  of  religion  is  the  Jewish  one  ever  since  the 
great  seers  of  Israel  hurled  their  scathing  denunciations  against 
sacerdotalism,  demanding  individual  rectitude  and  social  righteous- 
ness. The  world  is  coming  ever  nearer  to  the  lofty  prophetic  view. 
Are  our  ceremonials  vocal  of  this  prophetic  truth  ?  I  am  far  from 
believing  that  Reform's  work  is  accomplished  by  a  mere  remodel- 
ling of  the  Sukkah  and  Lulab  or  the  Shofar  to  harmonize  them  with 
our  advanced  aesthetical  or  artistic  taste.  Reform  must  become 
constructive  and  positive,  aggressive  and  boldly  self-confident,  more 
imbued  with  the  creative  spirit  of  the  religious  genius  of  Judaism. 
It  is  by  no  means  sufficient  to  have  symbols  bringing  home  to  us 
the  glorious  memories  of  the  past.  We  must  have  such  as  hold  be- 
fore us  the  great  hopes,  promises  and  ideals  of  the  future  together 
with  practical  lessons  for  the  present.  The  feast  of  redemption 
must  tell  us  of  the  redemption  of  an  oppressed  world  and  of  the 

23 


great  universal  plan  of  liberty  allotting  its  burdens  and  its  tasks  to 
each  and  all.  So  must  the  Maccabean  feast  of  lights  proclaim  the 
ultimate  triumph  of  truth  and  justice  over  falsehood,  intolerance 
and  wrongdoing  everywhere.  So  will  each  festival,  the  Day  of  the 
Giving  of  the  Law  with  its  lesson  concerning  Ruth  and  the  Pros- 
elyte, and  Sukkoth  with  its  peace  offerings  for  the  seventy  nations 
of  the  world,  lead  us  out  of  the  narrowness  of  the  national  self  to 
the  broad  outlook  of  cosmopolitan  humanity  with  its  practical  aims. 
And  as  the  great  New  Year's  and  Atonement  Days  preached  since 
wellnigh  two-thousand  years  the  religion  of  manhood  and  of  broad 
humanity,  may  they  not  become  also  powerful  instrumentalities  of 
uniting  and  reconciling  all  classes  and  races  of  men  by  practical 
modes  of  readjusting  the  inadequacies  of  social  life  suggested  by 
symbols  taken  from  the  Yom  Kippur  Haphthara  (Isaiah  Iviii)  and 
the  Jubilee  idea  connected  with  the  Yom  Kippur  (Lev.  xxv)  ? 

It  has  been  said  that  in  emphasizing  our  mission  to  preach  pure 
ethical  monotheism  we  are  fast  losing  our  Jewishness  which  is  main- 
tained only  through  separatistic  Jewish  observances  of  the  Oriental 
type.  It  seems  to  me  that  they  labor  under  a  great  delusion  who 
earnestly  believe  that  the  Occidental  Jew  in  general  will  ever  fash- 
ion his  social  life  differently  from  that  of  the  people  amongst  whom 
he  lives.  And  if  he  were  to  do  so  he  would  merely  lessen  the  great 
opportunities  offered  him  by  this  age  of  ours  of  rendering  his  reli- 
gion "a  light  to  the  nations"  and  "a  blessing  to  all  families  on  earth." 
To  me  Judaism  is  an  ever-progressive  religion,  and  in  a  congenial 
atmosphere  of  freedom  and  moral  greatness  it  is  bound  to  expand, 
and  its  symbolic  rites  will  be  commensurate  in  suggestiveness  and 
intrinsic  value.  No  fear,  then,  that  the  Jew  may  lose  his  identity 
when  he  aspires  to  the  highest  aims  of  life,  buoyed  up  with  the  con- 
sciousness of  his  mission  for  the  world.  In  order  to  impress  the  Jew 
with  the  greatness  of  his  task  and  his  responsibility  as  mankind's 
priest  we  should  have  certain  ceremonies.  It  is  for  this  that  new 
symbolic  forms  may  have  to  be  created  expressive  of  the  Jew's 
world-duty  as  God's  chosen  one,  since  the  mere  prohibition  of  inter- 
marriage or  the  Abrahamitic  sign  of  the  covenant  is  not  sulTficiently 
indicative  of  Israel's  priest-dignity. 

24 


I  am  rcitlier  a  prophet  nor  the  son  of  a  prophet  l)ut  I  see  the  day 
dawning  when  the  larger  view  and  the  larger  life  of  the  new  age 
of  which  the  Jew  partakes  in  so  eminent  a  degree  will  suggest  reli- 
gious practices  and  symbolic  observances  offering  practical  lessons 
of  universal  love,  peace  and  righteousness  to  the  Jew  as  humanity's 
teacher  and  pattern.  Where  pessimists  see  nothing  but  decline  and 
decay,  I  see  a  gradual  transformation  leading  to  a  rejuvenation  of 
Judaism  and  a  broadening  out  of  its  scope  and  its  sphere  of  influ- 
ence. 

The  Rabbinical  dictum  oft  quoted  in  favor  of  abrogation :  "The 
Ceremonial  laws  will  have  lost  their  validity  in  the  world  to  come" 
(Niddah  6ib)  refers  to  the  world  of  the  spirit  in  which  man  has 
ceased  striving  and  aspiring.  As  long  as  man  is  in  a  frame  of  clay, 
he  needs  "signs"  and  "memorials"  to  remind  him  of  his  destiny  and 
duty.  Ceremonies  are  the  poetry  of  religion;  they  invest  life  with 
the  beauty  of  holiness.  The  need  of  such  has  been  felt  by  Judaism 
all  the  more  because  images  and  signs  representing  the  Deity  have 
at  all  times  been  scrupulously  shunned.  Imperceptibly,  however, 
old  ceremonies  are  transformed  and  finally  replaced  by  new  ones, 
while  some  have  become  distinctive  features  which  must  be  upheld 
to  keep  it  from  disintegration.  As  IMorris  Joseph  in  his  "Judaism 
as  Life  and  Creed"  correctly  says:  "That  a  law  or  an  observance 
tends  to  keep  up  Jewish  separateness  is  by  itself  no  valid  argument 
for  its  retention.  To  justify  its  continued  existence  it  must  show 
that  it  still  serves  a  moral  and  religious  purpose,  that  its  spiritual 
vitality  is  unexhausted.  Mere  separateness  is  not  an  ideal  to  be 
cherished.  Rightly  conceived  it  is  but  a  means  to  an  end,  and  that 
end  is  the  efifectiveness  of  the  Jew  as  a  religious  instrument.  If  it 
fail  to  secure  that  end  it  is  an  unmixed  evil." 

"Break  the  barrel  but  let  not  one  drop  of  the  precious  wine  flow 
out!"  This  is  the  way  the  Rabbis  characterize  a  seemingly  impossi- 
ble task.  Such  is  the  problem  Reform  has  to  solve.  Under  the  in- 
fluence of  time  the  old  forms  crumble  and  fall.  We  have  to  see  to 
it  that  the  fragrance,  the  spirit  of  the  old  be  not  lost  as  we  pass  on 
to  the  new. 


25 


i 


